Page 1 of 4

Genetic Sexual Orientation

Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:45 am
by Avatar
This might end up in the 'Tank or Close maybe...
Sexual Orientation Is Genetic in Worms

The sexual preferences of nematode worms can be changed by flipping a genetic master switch in their brains, a new study says.

A worm's sex is determined by chromosomes found in its DNA. If a worm is male, for instance, all the cells in the body—including those in the brain—will be male.

The scientists weren't able to change the gender of worms. But they were able to fool their nerve cells into acting like those of the opposite gender by manipulating the worms' genes.

"We'd like to ... understand how a group of [brain] cells actually produces ... a behavior," said study co-author Erik Jorgensen, a molecular biologist at the University of Utah.

Nematodes are tiny round worms, about a millimeter in length, that eat rotting fruit and ride on the backs of millipedes.

The species has two sexes, males and hermaphrodites. The hermaphrodites are basically females that can fertilize their own eggs.

The worms have behaviors that govern their sexual attraction and reproduction. For example, male worms are attracted to hermaphrodites and hermaphrodites avoid one another.

Sexual Brains

In the experiment Jorgensen and colleagues genetically manipulated a hermaphrodite worm's nervous system.

They took a gene that is responsible for sexual characteristics of male cells and turned it on in the hermaphrodites' brains.

This tricked their brains into acting like male brains. As a result, the hermaphrodite worms adopted male sexual behavior and became attracted to other hermaphrodites.

"They look like girls but they act like boys," study lead author Jamie White, a postdoctoral fellow at the University of Utah, said in a statement.

Many scientists believe that such sexual behaviors stem from parts of the brain that are larger in each respective gender.

Instead this experiment suggests that these behaviors can also stem from brain regions in which there are no noticeable size differences.

This tells us is that the brain is sexualized," study co-author Jorgensen said.

The study also found that the same nerve cells, or neurons, that produce male sexual behavior are present in hermaphrodites, only they serve a different purpose.

This means that males and females have identical brain cells that nevertheless produce different behaviors.

The study will be published online today in the journal Current Biology.

From Worms to People

"You might think this is a study about sexuality, but it's really our foothold on understanding the brain," Jorgensen said.

Worms and humans also share genes that are involved in brain function, according to Jorgensen.

"So what we learn about how the brain works in a worm will apply to our understanding of humans."


But there are huge gaps between species: Male nematodes have 383 neurons, while humans have a hundred billion neurons.

Those billions of human neurons enable more complex traits such as consciousness and create vast differences between individuals.

Odor Switches

In a similar experiment—also published in an upcoming issue of Current Biology—Douglas Portman and graduate student KyungHwa Lee, both molecular geneticists at the University of Rochester in New York, changed the sexual identity of nerve cells in nematodes' brains and sensory systems.

The researchers switched a female worm's odor preference to that of a male.

Male and hermaphrodite nematodes are drawn to different smells. For example, when given a choice between the two, hermaphrodites prefer a buttery odor, while males lean toward a vegetable smell.

Portman believes this might reflect nematodes' differing metabolic needs.

These results also support White and Jorgensen's research findings: that the hardware to create sexual behaviors is not unique to either sex.

"The sexual identity of neurons that are shared between both sexes is critical for generating sex-specific behaviors, and that is a big surprise," Portman said.

"The more splashy part of this paper gets at the question of how the sex of the nervous system determines behavior," he said.

"These studies show that the sexual identity of the cell does somehow tweak its function. But how that happens is not known."
The implication could be staggering...particularly the ethical question if this ever reaches humans...if you can, do you turn it off?

--A

Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 1:26 pm
by wayfriend
If there is anything more sacred than a person's life, it's a person's identity. I cannot imagine a moral position that protects the life of an unborn child but which allows that child's identity to be manipulated.

Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 3:14 pm
by The Laughing Man
even if that identity is based on defective genes or some sort of genetic mutation? What if they discover that homosexuality is a disease, or has a biological cause? Do we not cure them? Corky's identity is all wrapped up in his down's syndrome, do we not try to prevent that too? What I'm trying to say is I'm having a difficult time imagining a situation where a person grows up gay, and all that angst and strife that comes with it, only to learn his parents could easily have avoided it all. Tough call.

Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:25 pm
by wayfriend
I don't think it's a tough one at all: When in doubt, don't. If it's not yours, it's not your call.

Thinking up a scenario where it all works out flowery and sunshiney isn't really an argument. There's as many nasty ones that can be imagined.

Can you deny that, in the end, you're guessing what the unborn person would want?

Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 4:29 pm
by The Laughing Man
sure it'd be a guess, but if we're talking about a disease or mutation, choice really never comes into the equation does it? You don't choose to "cure" you're unborn child, you just do it?

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 7:28 am
by Avatar
It's a hell of a question. On the one side, I'm totally with WayFriend...on the other...well, lets just say that I suspect a case of "damned if you do, damned if you don't."

Mutation...well...mutation, for all its negative connotations, can be a good thing. Hell, we're a mutation if you wanna think of it that way.

--A

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:45 am
by Cail
As much as I loathe using the "playing God" argument, this is (or would be) playing God.

An emotional, compassionate appeal can be made to manipulate an unborn's genetic code in the case of Downs Syndrome or Spinal Bifida. And within the social framework of even 20 years ago, that same argument could be used to "turn off" homosexuality as well.

This has got some scary implications.

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 11:51 am
by Avatar
Totally agree. Now, I've go nothing against playing god. :D Somebody has to, and since I think there's just us... ;)

But while I'd be all in favour of turning off the downs or cerebral palsy or whatever gene, those are diseases / conditions.

Turning off what amounts to a harmless idiosyncracy is far too close to psycho-surgery for me, and I'm against that, unless the person involved chooses it for themselves. Which is pretty impossible in this case.

--A

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:08 pm
by iQuestor
I would agree for severe diseases like those mentioned, but I think it would require some strict guidelines as to what could be done and what could not. Homosexuality wouldnt be one of those cases, it isnt cut and dried. Spinal Bifida is. Perhaps the guideline is sever physical/mental handicap ?

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:19 pm
by Avatar
Yeah, the ethical guideline. Of course, as Esmer mentioned, what if homosexuality or any other personality / whatever issue becomes considered as a physical or mental handicap?

And what's gonna happen when people blame their parents for not "turning it off?"

Once it can be done, it will be done, for good or ill or both.

--A

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:28 pm
by Cail
As recently as the late '80s, I had textbooks that referred to homosexuality as "deviant". Homosexuality was considered a mental defect for quite some time.

Av also makes a good point. Would a gay man be able to sue his parents for not flipping the switch to make him "normal"?

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:33 pm
by Avatar
Cail wrote:Homosexuality was considered a mental defect for quite some time.
Yeah, and now there might be a "cure" for it. I don't think many gays would elect to have it removed from them now, but to put people in a position where they can choose their childs sexual orientation...that's getting a little creepy.

Anybody read Black Milk by Robert Reed?

--A

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:34 pm
by Cail
It's beyond creepy.

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:39 pm
by Avatar
On the other hand, can you have one without the other? Surely it's not only ethical, but desireable, to remove defects...it's a bloody short step from defects to undesireable physical/mental traits though. Especially when some people might see them as the same thing...

--A

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:42 pm
by Cail
If we accept that homosexuality is an acceptable lifestyle (choice, orientation, whatever), then it is unconscionable that parents would be able to eliminate it prepartum. If we allow parents to eliminate homosexuality, then the message is that homosexuality is in fact undesirable and deviant.

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 12:54 pm
by Avatar
Agree totally. But some people do see it that way.

--A

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 1:46 pm
by wayfriend
After they "cure" homosexuality, what else might they "cure"? Slow learners? the unadept at sports? people with certain skin pigmentations? (Redheads are seriously maladapted for the globally warmed future, you know.)

This is so much bigger than homosexuality - you can't realistically explore the ethical implications by looking at just homosexuality, just as you can't by only looking at Downs Syndrome. In fact, it's such a freighted topic, you probably shouldn't use it as the basis of any ethical decision in this area.

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 1:48 pm
by Cail
I don't disagree with you a bit.

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 6:01 pm
by Avatar
Yeah, I think we're all on the same page here. Those of us who've noticed this topic at least. ;)

Thing is, I think each potential application will have to be discussed as an individual topic...nothing can be a catchall here. As WayFriend says, and I think we all agree...where does it stop?

--A

Posted: Mon Oct 29, 2007 9:14 pm
by emotional leper
Avatar wrote:Yeah, I think we're all on the same page here. Those of us who've noticed this topic at least. ;)

Thing is, I think each potential application will have to be discussed as an individual topic...nothing can be a catchall here. As WayFriend says, and I think we all agree...where does it stop?

--A
We won't turn our offspring into something that we perceive as inhuman. That's where it stops.